From āFunlosophyā, a series of articles for a newsletter.
Sitting around in lockdown, staring at the same ten walls (or however many interior walls your house has), escapism can be a very appealing pursuit. There are many forms of escapism, but here weāll be looking at a theoretical, sitting-in-one-place, ultimate method of escaping the humdrum or suffering of life in this world.
In the Homeric epic the Odyssey, Odysseus and his intrepid chums stumble across a land populated by the ālotus-eatersā. These guys do nothing more than sitting around eating from the Lotus plants that grow there, which puts them in a continual blissful state where the problems and cares of the world melt away into total insignificance. Odysseus was a stick-in-the-mud and stopped his men from partaking in the local culture, whisking them away to the next land, where they would be eaten by a cyclops.
Imbibing narcotics as a form of escapism is clearly something people have been enjoying for thousands of years, but the idea of ālotus-eatingā has been applied to philosophical discussion: to what extent would people choose to escape real life?
Robert Nozick put forward the idea of a lotus-eater machine, which he termed the āExperience machineā, a device that people could plug into that would simulate a perfect and happy existence. He was using the thought experiment to refute the philosophical concept of hedonism, especially in classical utilitarianism, but weāre going to focus on the aspect of escapism. The concept didnāt originate with Nozick, of course; the idea of an experience machine that simulates a better existence to real life has been the topic of science fiction at least as far back as the 1920s, and the conclusions drawn are often reflective of society at the time.
The main thrust of the thought experiment is, would you choose to plug in?
Our lotus-eater machine will perfectly simulate a blissful and wonderful life, with enough realism that you wonāt be aware of its artificiality while youāre plugged in. Life will be exactly what you want it to be ā the lotus-eater machine will be programmed to precisely your desires, and you will be āpulled outā at ten-year intervals to check youāre still happy with the program. Each time you are plugged back in, you will have no memory of these checks, or indeed the outside world at all. The simulated life will be a perfect and fulfilling existence, free from regret or real-world-homesickness at least while youāre plugged in. You wonāt see your friends or family, or interact with anything that actually exists, but the facsimiles in the simulation will be completely believable, quite possibly improved.
So, by indulging our escapism, exchanging the harsh realities of life for an ideal existence, are we losing anything? The world within is simulated, but as real to our minds as the actual world. Since the only thing we can be sure of in this life is our own experience, would this life actually be any less ārealā, despite its artificial beginnings?
Consider whether you would choose to plug in. Would your choice be different if you were aware it was a simulation, and that the real world waited outside? If you object to the idea of living in a false reality, can you pinpoint what exactly you would be missing? If itās āreal interactionsā or āreal struggle and achievementsā, are you sure this would matter if your mind was convinced all experiences in the machine were real?
Finally, imagine if, as you were reading this, you were suddenly woken, to find yourself sat in a machine, a technician standing before you. They explain that you have spent the past X years in their simulation machine, presenting a better world than the real one. They give you the option of leaving and heading into a world that would presumably be far less pleasant than the one youāve been experiencing, the one you thought was the āreal oneā. Or, the technician says, you can plug back in, and continue to enjoy the life of the lotus-eater. What would you do?